PROOF of my assertions there is no Islamic threat in AmericaTopic: General politics

Those of you who have followed along have noticed that I repeat - the Government and Media are LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH about an Islaimc threat IN America.

They are LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH when they take a threat, real, imagined, or not yet materilaized, OVER THERE in the MID EAST, and play a sick projection game to TERRORIZE AMERICANS (yes, GOVERNMENT terrorism) into believing they are at risk.

Notice my main point, that since 9-11, which was clearly a "they did it" event, that there has not been ONE Islamic Boogeyman attack in the US

A couple home grown wanna be posers making big firecrackers does not qualify.

Belive me, if the Islamic Boogey Man wanted to stir up shit in the US, its too easy, they could poison the water or blow up power substations, all that infrastructure is UN GUARDED.

They havent, they dont want to.

And now, PROOF of my assertions from the (a) source, and Islamist magazine (well done too)

There are many references to doing some thing like shoot a gun or blow something up, but how many are in reference to doing so IN THE UNITED STATES?

NONE

Read, from Issue 10, TWO CRITICAL POINTS:

"O Muslims, the film produced in America which insults our messenger Muhammed, comes in a chain of THE CRUSADE attacks on Islam"

(page 2, I guess)

NOTICE CAREFULLY THE USE OF THE WORD CRUSADE. That means CATHOLIC CRUSADE. Read up on the history of that in connection with the Churches Crusades and Inquisitions. Who has a large influence in Washington DC? The CATHOLIC CHURCH.

"All should strive together towards one goal; EXPELLING US EMBASSIES FROM MUSLIM LANDS..." (Capitals supplied)

THEY COULD GIVE A DAMN LESS ABOUT THE UNITED STATES PROPER

They are over there, we are here, and they cant get here, unless Obama lets them in from Mexico.

They are rebeling against the un ending warmongering of Obama the Muslim and US Government and military. They dont give a crap about Joe and Sally Workaday in America.

PROOF of my assertions there is no Islamic threat in AmericaTopic: General politics

Those of you who have followed along have noticed that I repeat - the Government and Media are LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH about an Islaimc threat IN America.

They are LYING THROUGH THEIR TEETH when they take a threat, real, imagined, or not yet materilaized, OVER THERE in the MID EAST, and play a sick projection game to TERRORIZE AMERICANS (yes, GOVERNMENT terrorism) into believing they are at risk.

Notice my main point, that since 9-11, which was clearly a "they did it" event, that there has not been ONE Islamic Boogeyman attack in the US

A couple home grown wanna be posers making big firecrackers does not qualify.

Belive me, if the Islamic Boogey Man wanted to stir up shit in the US, its too easy, they could poison the water or blow up power substations, all that infrastructure is UN GUARDED.

They havent, they dont want to.

And now, PROOF of my assertions from the (a) source, and Islamist magazine (well done too)

There are many references to doing some thing like shoot a gun or blow something up, but how many are in reference to doing so IN THE UNITED STATES?

NONE

Read, from Issue 10, TWO CRITICAL POINTS:

"O Muslims, the film produced in America which insults our messenger Muhammed, comes in a chain of THE CRUSADE attacks on Islam"

(page 2, I guess)

NOTICE CAREFULLY THE USE OF THE WORD CRUSADE. That means CATHOLIC CRUSADE. Read up on the history of that in connection with the Churches Crusades and Inquisitions. Who has a large influence in Washington DC? The CATHOLIC CHURCH.

The attacks in Boston are not "Islamist Jihad" as proven by two facts (FACTS< not Government or media hype)

1.) the targets of so called radical Islam are the US GOVERNMENT and WORLD TRADE. The 9-11 attacks were not against the Boston Marathon (a gathering of ordinary Citizens) but against the WORLD TRADE Center and the US GOVERNMENTS PENTAGON (home of the war machine)

2. There have been MILLIONS of opportunities since 9-11 for the Islamist Boogey Man to have attacked Joe and Sally Ordinary since then, NO one has.

But, last week, Joe and Sally Ordinary were standing on the street at a mass victim rally, and were attacked impersonally (theres a key idea)

The attackers are immediately linked by the Gummit, which is under attack by Islam, and its complicit lap dog media as being "Islamist"

They arent MORONS, they are RUSSIAN.

The REAL shit may have just hit the fan.

It makes no sense to link the overseas operations of anti US Govt and Military ops to a quasi random attack on the Ordinaries on the street in Boston, no one in Boston is screwing with them overseas that Im aware of.

That is illogical, someone so in posession of their faculties to carry out such a complicated deed is not insane. They are logical. Its just that the Western mind which revolves around self doesnt understand it.

The Western mind has been brainwashed daily by Govt and Media propaganda about Islam and is now blind deaf and dumb. A few of them are literally deaf now...

These two men are from the former RUSSIAN FEDERATION, THEY ARE NOT ISLAMISTS OR ARABS. That they sympathise with the Islamist cause is not a first cause.

What they did does not fit the MO of Islamist Jihad, that is against Government. They did something against ordinary Citizens, but in an inspecific manner, against no one in particular.

Adding all this together shows that these were two young idealists from RUSSIA who came to the US. The attack is in retaliation for something. The attack, against random Citizens only makes logical sense if in retaliation for a similar US ATTACK AGAINST RANDOM ORDINARY CITIZENS SUCH AS OBAMAS DRONE ATTACKS IN AFGHANISTAN, which was a recent theater of operations for Russia, too.

Light coming on yet?

Their attacks in Boston are in retaliation for the US attacking and murdering innocents overseas in the past, with drones or military capacity. Or, maybe some similar event has happened recently and the media are suppressing it, or just plain pig-ignorant. Id give them both...

Again, critical point, just because they might agree with the ideals of Islam, does NOT mean they are carrying out Jihad, because that is reserved for card carrying MUSLIMS.

THis is about political revenge for the US killing innocents and there may be more coming.

Thats particualrly bad because if so, there are many centers of mass victims in the US, with people blind, deaf, dumb, jumping at shadows, and UN ARMED.

1. detonation, like bomb, has a SPECIFIC MEANING- to cause an extremely HIGH VELOCITY event. A light bulb filament with the glass broken off can NOT initiate ANYTHING either high speed or high energy, the bulb comes on much too slowly and contains little energy. It gets hot enough to melt, but hot is not detonate- it gets hot VERY slowly.

" As I was driving back from Home-depot today, we my standard load of wood for another project, I saw 10 protesters standing on the sidewalk in front of our little city hall building; that is correct 10 no more no less, led by a wimp dude in a pink shirt, holding signs, which were all printed exactly the same, so it showed organization. They were protesting to end gun violence; naturally I couldn't help but stop. I politely asked a question concerning their signs: How do you propose this: The answer vague at best, was what I expected: Background checks nation wide, end the gun-show loophole, and the Internet loophole etc. When I explained that there was no loophole in regards of the Internet; the pink dude, became very agitated, and started shouting at me to leave, calling me a supporter of murder, ever so yelling louder and louder, hope to draw attention to us. When he saw no one was really paying him any attention except the women, and old senile men there, he asked how do I know that: That’s when I handed him one of my business cards: IT WAS PRICELESS. I also added that I never knew guns were violent, my firearms weren't violent, they have never even spoken to me, and what about knife, and golf clubs, and baseball bats, and rabid aardvarks; yes I did say that, it throws them off track real quick. It was speechless, had that deer in the headlight stare, I turned aground, saying good day, got back into the truck, and headed home. I went into my armory and asked if any of my firearms had anything they wanted to say to me; they still haven’t responded back. "

Will Glenn Beck buy your gold back that he tricked you into buying, or sit back and say "oh well, too bad for the suckers that listened to me and bought the single worst investment on the planet due to survivalist hysteria?"

Re "drones" being discussed this week in the context of appointing a CIA Director.

These are not drones, they are "UAS" - Un-manned Aerial SYSTEMS.

They are remotely piloted military weapons systems. “Drone” is deliberately misused and conceals a great danger.

A drone is an autonomous craft that flies by a pre programmed computer course guided by GPS, they do not have pilots. Drones are commercially available at $10,000. Ive seen ads on line for them.

These craft being falsely called drones are Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) and have military pilots controlling them remotely. I was told this week that they also at times have pilots that are "contractors" flying these armed craft, and that means only one thing. CIA/NSA or some other Govt Agency. NO one turns such a weapons system over to a corporate contractor. At least not if they are in their right mind.

See the attached document from the Congressional Research Service, R42136 for the history of UAS development, and admission they are stealth craft. (attached)

UAV’s (un-manned aerial vehicles) are a sub-set of UAS and are MILITARY STEALTH AIRPLANES, invisible to radar systems managing commercial airliner traffic.

"Stealth" means three things:

1. fuselage and frame design that is low- observable to radar, meaning a low radar cross section, metal framework that is non- magnetic and special materials that absorb and scatter microwave energy. Radar is microwave energy. If the plane doesnt reflect it back, then the plane cannot be detected.

2. microwave comms subsystems for both 3-C (command, control and comms) and confusing ground based radar systems. These radar countermeasures send back false echo position signals that make the ground radar system think its somewhere its not.

3. 3-C systems that are sat based.

The only way to detect military stealth craft is by satellite. Part of the reason, then, that these UAS are so dangerous is that while a full size bomber or fighter such as the B-2 or F-117 can be detected with enough radar power, and they can confuse radar systems, these UAS are so small that the chance of detecting them even with high powered ground systems is very small.

One can be flown over an airport, crash into or attack a passenger jet and no one but the military or CIA will know 'who did it.'

Realize that the context of this weeks discussion about UAS is not military use, but in the discussion of appointing a CIA Director, and whether the POTUS and CIA will use them in America. "Military use of drones" is a false flag argument.

Not only can the attack be hidden behind stealth invisibility, but also behind military or Government secrecy.

The potential for misuse, to deliberately attack a commercial craft or other target, not be visible, then blame it on another actors such as 'Islamist terrorists' is immense.

The next Bradley Manning can decide, not to steal and disclose sensitive documents, but to blow up a plane or building and start the next 10 years of illegitimte war IN THE US. Manning had honorable intent in exposing corruption. The next time it might not be so honorable.

UAS are not needed for US surveillance, we have far more sophisticated satellite capacity than that, and have ground based, hand held equipment that can to that job. Technology existed in the late 1980s to see people through walls and doors with hand held cameras, I saw the camera, it was developed for the USAF in Ohio.

We do not need flying military systems for that. I can buy cameras from industrial sources for $ 5-10K that can see inside peoples houses. A flying military weapon is NOT needed for that.

US Law Enforcement has that technology already, they have no legitimate need for military weapons systems.

We have had sat technology since the 1970s that can see the patterns in material in clothing worn by a person on the ground FROM SPACE. That came first hand from an ex mil commander who saw the photos.

A UAS might be valuable for intel and recon overseas where we dont have as much sat capacity and its risky to fly over with a piloted craft, but those limitations do not exist in the US, its our sats and planes flying over our territory, so any argument that UAS are needed for intel is a bald faced lie.

A recent ruse is that UAS use will be safe as it will have a flight plan authorized. A UAS flight plan is irrelevant to safety, a plan does not tell where these stealth craft really are. Since they cannot be tracked by ordinary radar, they can be diverted from flight plan and back and no one will know it.

It is also a false narrative that UAS are needed to stop a terror attack. Terrorists do not phone ahead or publish their plans on-line. It is false that this is justified (killing US Citizens) to stop an attack, as that admits they know its going to happen, and have refused or failed to stop it.

Our Constitution, Bill of Rights and Laws do not permit Government to use the "end justifies the means" rationale to murder Citizens without Due Process. That is exactly what they want to do.

There is a story this week about a probable UAS being flown over an airport in Chicago:

2 a drone is an autonomous craft. The craft being discussed now are NOT UNMANNED, they have remote MILITARY PILOTS

3 The S in system means CCC and WEAPONS SYSTEMS, THESE ARE NOT AIRPLANES, THEY ARE MILITARY WEAPONS SYSTEMS.

Heres the big kicker no one is discussing

4. THESE ARE STEALTH AIRCRAFT, THAT CANNOT BE TRACKED ON RADAR.

Your local airport CAN NOT DETECT THEM moments before a jet sucks one into an engine and kills 200 people in the resulting crash.

Realize we are WAY past the era of stealth aircraft systems.

What makes this problem WORSE is that such stealth craft can be used to MURDER WITH IMMUNITY as no one can TRACK THEIR MILITARY UAS.

The only way to track stealth craft is by SATELLITE.

Craft like the stealth fighter operate by radar (microwave). The F117A has two microwave ports, one on each side. One is for spoofing microwave stations on the ground to confuse the echo location signals

There just MIGHT be a real Representative in --- Im about to make a false statement, keep the next phrase in mind as you read this-- "our District" --keep that phrase in mind, its false- (meaning WA State Legislative District 8).

I'd emailed our non Representing Representatives Klippert etc and someone named "Sharon Brown" who was apparently put in place of Delvin (LET the door hit you in the ass on the way out for lying to me...)

No loss there...

I'd written to all of them about the un Constitutional gun laws in this State and also the attempt to overturn the Subversion law.

To my utter shock and disbelief, the phone rang Sunday and Sen. Brown was on the other end. She had called to tell me that she supported the Second Amendment and she had a CCW permit.

I have to somewhat apologise for throwing a wet blanket on her enthusiasm, but I had no choice but to tell her that her CCW permit was her participating in an UN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.

CCW permits are UN CONSTITUTIONAL because they infringe on a Citizens Rignt to Keep and Bear Arms even temporarily.

NO INFRINGEMENT WHATSOEVER IS ALLOWED.

She said something about "Constitution giving rights" and I explained that it did no such thing.

She seemed surprised by both statements. IN her defense, I was surprised that I DIDNT UNDERSTAND IT EITHER, and if you read this Blog carefully, I have Blogged that discovery process.

I didnt get it because I didnt care. I changed that.

I explained that the Constitution does not grant Rights, it FORBIDS the Legislature to make gun laws and the WA Legislature DID SO ANYWAY.

All of 9 RCW with the exception of subsection 290 (or is it 291, the pre emption portion) is UN CONSTITUTIONAL and that makes 290 irrelevant.

Id mentioned being interested in floating a Petition to overturn 9 RCW and she agreed it was a good time to do it, and people were really stirred up over the matter (paraphrased)

Why doesnt SHE voulenteer to enter that as a Bill?

BUT, Im happy to say SHE CALLED!!

MAYBE THERES HOPE TO GET A GOOD ONE!!!!!!

And what about the false statement about 'in our District?"

These people who supposedly "represent us" are NOT IN OUR DISTRICT, they are hidden away in Olympia (or substitute your State Capitol where your supposed Representatives hide out in) and almost entirely REPRESENT THEMSELVES.

Sorry, but showing up glad-handing at the twice yearly Constituent meeting that most people know nothing about, with 50 people IS NOT REPRESENTING THE PEOPLE.

Back in the 1700s, when the population of the States was small, it was no problem for the People to choose a REPRESENTATIVE to REPRSENT THEM.

Its no problem to have a meeting with 1,000 people present and poll them.

The puropse of a Representative is to then take that Vote to the Legislature and cast it AS IF THE PEOPLE THEMSELVES WERE CASTING IT.

They dont do that. Proof- if so, theyd have a Constituent meeting for EVERY BILL.

Showing up twice a year does NOT constitute "representation."

They represent themselves in a twisted, sick and convoluted method of first agreeing to REPRESENT A POLITICAL PARTY CORPORATION to get on the Ballot, then promising to represent people WHO VOTED FOR THEM, and NEITHER IS DOING THEIR JOB.

Their job is to represent ALL the people AFTER the election.

Ive been saying that for several years now, someone has finally picked it up, or figured it out on their own, I dont know which, and that idea of all places ended up on ABC (American Broadcasting of Communism) a week or so ago.

With populations in the millions it is not possible for a Rep to directly poll all Citizens. It HAD BEEN possible by mail to do so, apparently no one wants to do so.

With computer technology its EASY.

Time to do it. Since its not a matter of voting for a Representative, security is not as large an issue. That last sentence was somewhat sarcastic considering the clear and admitted voting fraud in the last election(s) with rigged voting machines and Oba-Mao supporters claiming they voted more than once.

Considering the crap the Gummit and parasites and hacks like Google are up to, never mind the attempts your neighbors and wardrivers can make to steal your ID or hack your computer, here are a couple cool tricks to help isolate yourself.

1. The Internet is great for buying things with a credit card, problem is, the HOAX thats floated on un-suspecting shoppers about "secure shopping sites."

they are LYING to you about security. Why? Not that the site doesnt use a 'https' connection and claim to use SSL and encryption technology, they arent telling you, as they probably dont know, about the parasites that are looking in on your supposedly secure shopping session like GOOGLE.

Heres how to get rid of the bastards.

If youre doing a transaction with ABC co on line, it APPEARS that your computer is connected to ABCs and all is secure. It isnt, because its unlikely that ABC hosts the connections and websites that you do the transaction on.

Usually, especially with small companies, they hire all that out.

Problem is, parasite bastards like Google are glomming onto your "secure connection" and can most likely RECORD the entire transaction.

Ive make many on line transactions that blocked these parasites with a simple trick to kick the Googles and ad sites off the secure connection. Its easy.

The trick is to exclude any site from connecting to your computer that isnt absolutely required to process the transaction.

Download Netscape 9, install it. Once installed, set the system DATE on your computer back a year. Clear the cache and browser history. If the browser was open, close and re-open it.

go to the shopping website and notice pop up dialog boxes start to appear, stating that 'this sites security certificate is not valid'

That means the security cert has a current date, that is now in the FUTURE from what date your computer thinks it is.

You have the option to accept the cert, or hit the ESC key and dismiss it, along with dismissing the website thats trying to connect.

If you have a virus scanner that allows tracking what connections are made to a browser, you can keep track of whats connecting.

Proceed to shop and check out, and hit ESC any time theres a pop up that isnt named after the shopping site.

I did one today and blocked about 6 parasite sites, including Google

realize any of these sites have access to record your CC NUMBER if they are connected.

Next trick to thwart the neigbors and Google-secure your Wi Fi

No, setting encryption only keeps the stupid people out, as long as they can see your router, youre a target

Forget tricks like hidden SSIDs also, all it take is an IP sniffer to find it.

to not be hacked, dont be SEEN.

that requires hiding the router so only you can see it.

To an RF CONNECTION, that is.

The router is a tiny radio station sending and receiving data. Anyone within a certain range (physically) can connect to it.

If they cannot receive the signal, they cannot connect to it.

Some routers can be modified with software to allow their transmit power to be raised and lowered (DD-WRT) but a hacker with a good high gain antenna can get around that.

Wi Fi signals are microwave, 2.4x GHz and the signals are funny, they are truly line-of-sight and bounce off metal surfaces.

Heres where we borrow some Gummit technology, as in putting sensitive communications sites underground and shielding them.

Put the router in the nearest HVAC duct. That will confine the signal to inside the furnace ducting. It will propagate through the house, but only inside the duct-work. It will exit through openings in the duct work, and in most structures, those openings point UP.

So, the signal goes up where some jackass wardriving down the street cannot receive it, theyd have to be on your houses ROOF.

Put your computers wireless adapter reasonbly near a duct outlet and voila, youre on, but no one else can see it.

For extra security, put your computers adapter under-ground, such as in a basement, also put your wireless modem, if you use one, underground so it has to 'look'upwards to get a signal. that means someone outside has to also be elevated, or very close to the house to attempt to intercept or detect that signal

With DD-WRT, reduce router transmit power. Less power- less range.

It works for me, I walk outside on the porch with my laptop and the network disappears.

So much for Googles car wandering around collecting Street View info...

"Well here they come---4 antigun bills from Olympia that will be heard THIS week! HB1588--sponsored by state Representatives Jamie Pederson (D-43), Mike Hope (R-44) and thirty-six other state Representatives, would criminalize the private sale of firearms. HB 1588 is nothing more than a regulatory scheme which would create a huge burden for law-abiding citizens. It would require that anytime you sell any firearm to a family member or friend, you will have to go through a gun dealer or law enforcement agency and pay a $20 fee (tax), with no guarantee of timely processing.Additionally, while Concealed Pistol License (CPL) holders are currently exempt from having to undergo a background check when purchasing a firearm from a dealer, there is no provision in HB 1588 that extends the CPL exemption to private sales.

HB1676---sponsored by state Representative Ruth Kagi (D-32) and thirteen other state Representatives, is a so-called "child access prevention" bill which would single out the storage of firearms for criminalization under certain circumstances.

We already have a gun negligently stored law

HB1703-- sponsored by state Representative Laurie Jinkins (D-27) and sixteen other state Representatives. This bill would create a $25 tax on all retail gun sales to create a "firearm-related injury and death prevention program." It would also tax ammunition purchases!

“Alright, we’re gonna go ahead with the plan with the burners,” one officer says.

“Copy,” replies another.

“Like we talked about,” the first officer responds.

“The burners are deployed, and we have a fire,” says another officer moments later, before the police dispatcher repeats the statement.

Within minutes of the fire starting, police note that the cabin is “starting to collapse.”"

A CS CANISTER DOES NOT BURN A HOUSE DOWN IN "MINUTES"

It is not primarily an incendiary device, its supposed to produce gas.

Boy, SOMEONE is DESPERATE to get into my computer today... Im seeing attempts to connect being blocked...

But, you say, Dorner was a murderer and got what he deserved.

You are a COMMUNIST.

In our Nation, he is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY BY A COURT OF LAW, NOT MURDERED BY BLOOD AND REVENGE THIRSTY POLICE.

Police are not Government, they require govt permission to operate, and they do NOT have ours through the Constitution.

Think about this; why is it that POLICE must get a WARRANT from a COURT to SEARCH a CITIZENS property?

Simple, Police are un Constitutional and have no right or permission to search, they must go back to a Constitutional entity (Court) and get permission.

That system is a 100% SCAM. IT IS UN CONSTITUTIONAL

Back to Dorner. Same as in Waco, how much ammo could he have, compared to 100 of them outside? food? water?

Instead of MURDER him, as the MURDERED INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN IN WACO, why didnt they just wait it out? take cover and keep him shooting until he runs out of ammo.

But, no, MURDER IS NOW SANCTIONED BY THE STATE.

WE ARE AT NAZI GERMANY

WE ARE AT PAGAN ROME

THIS SHIT HAS TO STOP.

The excuse is tha tthe police have some "right" to safety and therefore can justfiy MURDERING HIM.

GOVERNMENT HAS NO RIGHTS

POLICE HAVE NO RIGHTS

THEY DO IN COMMUNIST CHINA

IN AMERICA, THE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHTS, NOT GOVERNMENT.

We the People NEVER gave "rights" to government, never permitted them to employ Jack Booted Thugs called Police.

If they had OBEYED US, THIS INCIDENT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED.

This especially stinks considering it looks as if they went after him for planning to expose them for something, its called "cover-up"

But, you say, they took him out thus PROTECTING innocent Citzens?

You shit and fell in it too - THEY MURDERED TWO INNOCENT, UN CONNECTED CITIZENS JUST BECAUSE THEY HAD THE SAME KIND OF TRUCK.

Didnt I tell you about this a year ago, about killing not only innocent people, but those totally un connected to the event? I DID, right here

The BATF got a TANK from the MILITARY, and collapsed then set fire to the buildings at WACO, MURDERING INNOCENT WOMEN AND CHILDREN. I HAVE A VIDEO SHOWING IT, EMAIL FOR A COPY

a_patriot@ymail.com

Hitlers MO was to create an out-group, demonise them, set up a Straw Man argument that the out group was a danger to the in-group (Ayrian purity, inventing a threat to Germans at large which didnt exist.)